How funds for the needy are siphoned off for profit: “A distressing picture of how states routinely defraud taxpayers of millions of federal dollars.” ―Boston Review

Government aid doesn’t always go where it’s supposed to. Foster care agencies team up with companies to take disability and survivor benefits from abused and neglected children. States and their revenue consultants use illusory schemes to siphon Medicaid funds intended for children and the poor into general state coffers. Child support payments for foster children and families on public assistance are converted into government revenue. And the poverty industry keeps expanding, leaving us with nursing homes and juvenile detention centers that sedate residents to reduce costs and maximize profit, local governments buying nursing homes to take the facilities’ federal aid while the elderly languish with poor care, and counties hiring companies to mine the poor for additional funds in modern day debtor’s prisons.

In The Poverty Industry, Daniel L. Hatcher shows us how state governments and their private-industry partners are profiting from the social safety net, turning America’s most vulnerable populations into sources of revenue and stealing billions. As policy experts across the political spectrum debate how to best structure government assistance programs, a massive siphoning of the safety net is occurring behind the scenes. In the face of these abuses of power, Hatcher offers a road map for reforms to realign the practices of human service agencies with their intended purpose, to prevent the misuse of taxpayer dollars—and ensure that aid truly reaches those in need.

“Meticulously researched . . . lifts the lid on a system that rather than helping the needy, systematically turns them into ‘a source of revenue.’” ―The Guardian

“Walks through the evolution of legal doctrine regarding rights of vulnerable persons [and] provides compelling evidence that scholars, policymakers, and advocates should take a closer look at the political and business relationships shaping contracting decisions involving for-profit firms.” ―Political Science Quarterly